Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Best Macro lens for Nikon D90

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Best Macro lens for Nikon D90

    I'm looking at purchasing a macro lens for my D90. I currently have the 18-105 kit lens and a 50mm F/1.8 that will focus at 18". I want something that I can get closer with, mostly for garden and nature. Any advise on lens selection/length?

  • #2
    It depends on your budget, really. You won't go wrong with most macro lenses. Nikon offers a 40mm ($280), 60mm ($600), 85mm ($530), and a 105mm ($985). That said, depending on your camera you might also be happy with a third party lens like a Sigma. I had a Sigma 105 for a while and was quite happy with it, but I've since replaced it with the Nikon 105.

    Personally, I think that a slightly longer macro lens is more useful if you're going to try shooting things like bugs or that you can't always get super close to. So I'd say the 85 or 105mm would be good there. But again, it totally depends on your budget.
    Nikon D600 | D90 | Sony NEX-3
    Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8 | Nikkor 70-300 | Lensbaby 2.0 | Nikkor 85 f/1.8D | Nikkor 105 f/2.8 VR | Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 | Nikkor 10.5 f/2.8 Fisheye | Sony 16 f/2.8 | Sony 18-55 | 2xSB600 | Orbis Ring Flash Adapter
    My Flickr

    Comment


    • #3
      From what I understand the best bang for the buck is the Tamron 90mm if you want go 3rd party. In the research I have done, this may be the one I end up going with. I like macro, but not enough to go full bore, but it will also make a decent portrait lens as well.
      Tamron SP 272E Macro lens - 90 mm - F/2.8 - Nikon F
      Luke.
      500px
      facebook
      flickr

      Comment


      • #4
        I would stick with Nikon, unless you can't come up with the bucks -- they are typically sharper. Also in this case bigger is better as it gives you a greater working distance allowing light to fall on your subject. When you use the shorter lenses you are so close that you and the camera block too much light.
        Nikon D800e, D300, D5000, NIKON GLASS 85mm F/1.8 D, 105mm f/2.8 Micro AF-S VR, 70-200 AF-S VR f/2.8, 28-300 AF-S VRII,10.5mm Fisheye, 24-70 AF-S f/2.8, TC-20E III AF-S, Sigma 12-24 HSM, Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM, Sigma 150-500 OS, 2 SB-600 Speedlights, SB-900 speedlight, 4 YN-622N transceivers, Manfrotto 190MF3 tripod & 322RC2 ball grip head. - NJ, USA
        Flickr Photobucket
        Ok to edit and repost my shots on DPS forums

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by kirbinster View Post
          I would stick with Nikon, unless you can't come up with the bucks -- they are typically sharper. Also in this case bigger is better as it gives you a greater working distance allowing light to fall on your subject. When you use the shorter lenses you are so close that you and the camera block too much light.
          I have the 40mm: to get 1:1 you have to be basically on top of your subject, and youre either using flash with modifiers (and bounce cards of some kind) or youre using a long exposure time, and it's never a sure thing. That being said: I didnt get it to do 1:1. Thats too close for me, and too finicky. I got it as a normal lens (to support/supplant my 50/1.8) but also to get closer than the 50 does.

          I've realized I can do about 90% of my photos with a 35-50mm, f/2.8 lens. I found 50 to be a touch too long, and got the 40 instead of the 35/1.8 because it gave me that bit more versatility. I also got it for less than the 35/1.8 cost.
          I am responsible for what I say; not what you understand.
          adammontpetit.com
          Gear List
          500PX | Graphic Design

          Comment

          Working...
          X